About your Search

20130318
20130326
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)
correspondent kim ghattas and her book, "the secretary: a joinny with hillary clinton from beirut to the heart of american power." in it, ms. ghattas examines ms. clinton's role and seeks to answer whether u.s. power is in decline. the program is about an hour. >> host: i think where we should begin is to talk a little bit about your biography, because i think as much as this book is about hillary clinton and her time as secretary of state, it's also about your experience from beirut to covering the secretary of state around the world. so why don't you just begin by talking a little bit about where you came from. >> guest: well, great. sure. jamie, thank you for having me, and i'm flighted by your first question because, of course, the biggest star in the book is hillary clinton herself, but this isn't just a biography of an historic woman, it's also a different take on the whole issue of american power. and as you mention, i come from beirut. i grew up there. i was born in beirut in the middle of the civil war in 1977, and i lived my whole life in lebanon, first 13 years in war and then the r
clinton from beirut to the heart of american power." she conditions miss clinton's role, and whether u.s. power is in decline. the program is about an hour. >> where we should begin is to talk about your biography. i think as much as this book is about hillary clinton and her time as secretary of state, it's also about your experience from beirut to covering the secretary of state around the world. so, why don't you just begin by talking about where you came from. >> guest: great. thank you very much for having me. i'm delighted to be here and delighted by your first question. the star, the biggest star in the book is hillary clinton herself. but this isn't just a biography of an historic woman. it's also a different take on the whole issue of american power, and as you mention i come from beirut. i grew up there i was born in beirut in the middle of the civil tbhar 197- -- civil war in 1977 and i lived my whole life in lebanon, 13 years in war, and then the rest of the time, there was not exactly a stable country, so we've been through many, many ups and downs, and i lived through all
. an interview with kim ghattas and her book, trailing. she examines mrs. clinton's role in u.s. diplomacy abroad and also seeks to answer by the u.s. power is in decline. the program is about one hour. >> host: i think we should begin is to talk about your biography. as much as this book is about hillary clinton at a time the secretary of state, it's also about your experience from beirut, the sector of state around the world. so why don't you become a talking about where you came from. >> guest: thank you very much for having me. i'm delighted to be here and and a lot of by your first question. the biggest are in the book is hillary clinton herself. but this isn't just a biography of a historic woman. it's also a different take on the whole issue of american power. as you mentioned i come from beirut. i grew up there. i was born in beirut in the middle of the civil war in 1977. i did -- spit my whole life in lebanon. first 13 years in war and then the rest of the time that some people may know, beirut is not exactly this table country. so we've been through many, many ups and downs but i lived
you think of bill clinton? >> i think bill clinton is probably the finest communicator that has ever inhabited the white house. i think that if they ever break down and invite me over there, as i've asked them to do on numerous occasions, i probably would have a great evening talking to him. i think he's probably one of the friendliest people that has ever occupied that office. but i do not believe that he is what he represents himself to be. i find, of all of the promises that he made during the campaign, virtually to be null and void. abortion, for example. he said he wanted to make them safe, legal, and rare. well, he certainly continues to make them legal, but anything but rare. and a number of other things. i mean, from the whole gay rights thing-- he told them one thing, he's doing another; to taxes, and the rest. so i think he realized that the country was not going to elect a liberal, so he put a conservative face on, but the truth is coming out now. >> talk from your perspective about the ronald reagan and his belief in god and non- churchgoing that we saw, and bill clinton,
think about part of that where joseph knight talks about smart power and hillary clinton did a lot of work on that as well, that culture and ideas and the ability for people to know what's going on in other parts of the world and be inspired by that. there's a lot of that going on in terms of exchange of ideas between global peers in the ability during the protests in wisconsin on the collective bargaining issues. they were young people who are holding up signs that said walk like an egyptian which i thought was a great way of showing that local connectedness. those people felt inspired by what was going on in the arab spring around the same time and there was some kind of -- young people holding up the signs having that solidarity so that's a good way of thinking about the ability to, both from the west to other countries back to the west that young people are inspired and engage with their global peers. >> host: there has been criticism that young people have not been engaged in politics, in meaningful ways and they be their engagement feels cursory or superficial. does that fit?
. for example, bill clinton was not the first, and bill clinton was not the worst when it comes to misbehavior in high office. there's a long, long history of it. and eliot spitzer, arnold schwarzenegger, john edwards, these guys -- david petraeus had nothing on alexander hamilton. and what we find is if you read, for example, letters written by martha washington during those winter camps, she was tough. she was like a soldier. she didn't complain about the weather, she didn't complain about the harsh conditions, but she did complain about one thing. there was a tom cat one winter that was misbehaving, and it was noisy, noisy, and it kept her awake at night, so she nicknamed the tom cat alexander hamilton. [laughter] i also did a book a few years ago called "life in the white house," and it was about the presidents at ease. what do they eat? what hobbies do they have? what are they like as fathers and husbands? how did their their kids turn out? as another way of assess l presidential character, providing us with another lens. for example, we're all still trying to figure out dick nixon, right
this whole idea that josette talks about the smart power and hillary clinton did a lot of work on that as well to know what is going on in other parts of the world and be inspired by that. the protest and wisconsin on the collective bargaining issues there were young people holding up signs that say what why egyptian was a great way of showing that global connected mess. it's going on at the same time and was young people hanging up the signs having that solidarity's of that is a good way of thinking about on both ways both from the west to other countries and other countries back to the west that people are being inspired by their goebel peers. >> host: there has been criticism that young people haven't been engaged in politics in meaningful ways and maybe their engagement feels cursory or superficial. is that fair? >> guest: i don't think that's fair. if you look at the last cycles. the enthusiasm i would characterize in 2012 versus 2008 in terms of the number of young people going out campaigning and the number of people who are attending rallies was definitely decreased, bu
of staff to former president clinton said, this is the most predictable financial crisis in the history of the country that's looming. and this was several years ago. and nothing has gotten better since then. wii juswe just careen closer anr to the tipping point. senator gregg noted that mandatory spending is a primary -- unfortunately, all of the measures put in place have ignored smart entitlement reforms to control spending over the long term and comprehensive tax reforms to make the tax code more ta efficient. we all heard that before from people all across the political speck tom, republicans and democrats, liberals and conservatives. there is a growing consensus that all of these elements must be addressed. douglas holtz-eakin, former director of the congressional budget office noted that the level and projected growth of federal debt are is a threat to future prosperity. the nation, he said, despite claims to the contrary, remains on a damaging debt pathway. dr. holtz-eakin countered arguments that reducing the debt is not urgent because the crisis is a distant threat by pointing
.5 trillion in new revenue and to cover that price tag, president clinton revealed the hard truth. i'll quote president bill clinton. "they'll have to eliminate so many deductions like the ones for home mortgages and charitable giving, that middle-class families will see their tax bills go up. that's the promise of the ryan republican budget. million-dollar-class families will see their taxes bills go up. we don't. we take 7% out of that which means we can focus on the corporate tax spending, on the high-end deductions, the carried interest exception. so we don't have to go officer a the middle class tax cuts. let me close by reading one thing if i may have consent. we have just welcomed a new pope. the conference of catholic bishops had this to say about the ryan budget last year. congress faces a difficult task to balance needs and resources and allocate burdens and sacrifices. just solutions however must require shared sacrifice by all, including raising adequate revenues, eliminating unnecessary military and other spending and fairly addressing the long-term costs of health insurance and
was chief of staff for president clinton; very successful businessman. alan simpson, his cochair there, was a former republican senator from wyoming. and that's not what they told us. in the committee two years ago, in the budget committee, maybe a little over two years now they gave a joint statement in which they said this nation has never faced a more predictable financial crisis. and what they were saying was the level of debt we are operating on, the unsustainability of the debt path was so great that we will have some sort of fiscal crisis. i remember about that same time the chairman of the fed, mr. bernanke, testified that you have all these out years and you talk about the debt numbers and all that, but you really don't have to worry about them. i'm paraphrasing but this was pretty close to what he said. because i think these were his exact words: it will never happen. what he basically told us was there would be a fiscal crisis before we get this far down the road. the demographics: aging population, fewer workers, greater debt every year, mushrooming in the out years. so i'm
the chance to come up with the idea with the clinton the eye or the disappointment something going on that has nothing to do that we're talking about that stops you from doing your assignment but i cannot do that unless i am with you. those of the changes i see and they worry me. >> host: finally, with your book "always on" u.s. the question how much to blame that can be laid at the feet of technology themselves? >> i do. with thin ice example of what i believe is the case my students are lousy with punctuation they don't have a clue what to do with us ; or:or a, a sprinkle them like croutons on a caesar salad. it is not their fault they say they rely on spell check. but kindergarten through high school did anyone really focus on spelling? no. because the faculty is thinking i need to focus on other things to be of modern skis. it is not the students' fault. if we change expectations of goals in education instead of reflecting were being by yourself and thinking and reading for a long period of time with no distractions if students don't know how to do it is not technology's fault,
want and you actually expect bill clinton it's not president obama to say. but privately he is grousing. do you see in the 50's a man that is at war with himself over what he believes? >> i can see that. one of the most interesting things following this thread of mixing and civil rights, i mentioned the trip to africa and 67, and that's where we met martin luther king, dr. martin luther king who was 28-years-old at the time and nixon they've really got along. particularly trying to see nixon to lobby for the administration you wanted to get to eisenhower. they said sure, come and see me. they met in washington at the office and they stayed in touch regularly. and king really felt they had a correspondence he was really admired pity and he had a good sensitivity about this. the one black man and eisenhower's white house salmon named fred mauro and he wrote a book called a black book in the white house and he felt completely sort of alienated. people he felt prejudice but he felt -- he said fred i don't think you should always be talking about job issues that affect black people. i think
put forth by the breaux-thomas medicare commission presiden, pt bill clinton and alice rivlin. we'll be happy to take the amendment by unanimous consent. the presiding officer: the senator's time has expired. mrs. murray: madam president, i ask for the yeas and nays. the presiding officer: is there a sufficient second? there appears to be. mr. hatch: madam president? madam president? the presiding officer: the question is on amendment 432. the clerk will call the roll. vote: the presiding officer: are there any senators in the chamber wishing to vote or change their vote? if not, on this vote, the ayes are 96, the nays are 3. the amendment is agreed to. the senator from washington. without objection. under the previous order, there will be two minutes of debate equally divided in the usual form prior to a vote in relation to amendment 156 offered by mr. grassley. the senate will be in order. senators will take their confirmations out of the well. who yields time? mr. grassley: madam president? the presiding officer: the senator from iowa. mr. grassley: this amendment strikes a $97
compared to the government's effort throughout the clinton and in part of the bush administrations to degrade mortgage standards in order to increase home ownership. this contrary view was never put before the american people in time for its implications to be considered in the debate over dodd-frank. if that debate had occurred, it's unlikely that the dodd-frank act would have been enacted in anything like its current form. now, why did this debate not occur? why was there no competition in ideas on this matter? that is what i'll largely talk about today. for those not familiar with the argument that the financial crisis was caused by government policy, let me state it as succinctly as i can. before 1992 the vast majority of mortgages in the united states were prime mortgages with down payments of 10 to 20% and made to people with good credit records. fannie mae and freddie mac were the principal enforcers of these rules. delinquencies and defaults were few. in 1992 congress adopted legislation that required fannie and freddie to meet what were called affordable housing goals. the
of the network system with people like bloomberg, gates. and 73 in billionaires. and clinton is not a millionaire. smart money going into the land for peace, not influencing policymakers. and the city you are proposing may not be democratic but focusing on philanthropic efforts to change policies in ways that if you prefer is located. >> thank you. we will take a couple questions to take a picture. are you all waiting too was the back across. >> select four add another time. >> i am a journalist. i am attracted to the idea of cities trading information to see great ideas like transportation coming out of places like brazil. is the question about a whack of ideas, that we don't know what to do or going back to fraces fox piven's question behind her comments, the question of the power to get it done versus the power of those who profit from things not getting done. i would like to ask as a practical matter, you said the big issue was global warming. i would say the big issue is probably unique quality and the power, the world is brought to whitneits knees by banks run wi. how would you take on and
. here's the problem. there's a survey done during the clinton administration that claims 36% of gun transfers were done without a background. the president took the survey, rounded up, that the big problem is changing the term transfer. there's a big difference between god purchase. the vast majority of these transfers are within inheritance. i don't think it would've had quite the bite of the president said look, there's too many pairing given a gun to their kid it's not going through the proper regulation. it's not as scary as saying 40% of gun sales are going ahead. and this survey was done between november 9th 291 and december december 1994. it only involves 251 individuals , that's the other problem is most of the survey was done before it even went into effect. this survey is going all the way back to 1991. there's other problems i could point out with this, britishers ridley misleading. these are not going -- they would say about 13.3% and that's even though most of his theater time is done before you had the brady act going into effect. even 13.3% is much too high because gu
clinton did with aid to families with dependent children. so you have this reform of entitlements, reform of the various welfare programs and tax reform taking the top rate on individuals to 25%, the bottom rate to 10%. so you have two rates, 10 and 25. now we go from 10 up to 44 these days. and the corporate rate, which is 35% right now, the average in europe is 25. so when we compete internationally, we've hobbled ourselves because we tax our companies, our manufacturing companies more harshly than they do theirs. he wants to take that rate to 25 so it's close, so it's at the european average. now, i'd rather be better than europe. the canadians are about 17%. i prefer the canadian rate than the european average. so the republicans and democrats in their two budgets really show who they are. now, there's also a third budget which is the progressive budget which is the more liberal democrats, and they do massive new taxes on top of the ones i discussed plus massive new spending. so you have a sense of there's some democrats who want to go even further into big government than patty murra
clinton and the democrats with some help from some republicans had put in place, they shredded it under george bush by giving tax breaks to the wealthiest, putting two wars on the credit card, a prescription drug plan that didn't allow medicare to negotiate for lower prices, and the deficit went wild. and it didn't even make sense from an -- i am an old -- i am old. i'm an old economics major, and i remember the basics. you know, you don't go into such deep, deep debt because if there is a recession, you can't really help spend your way out of it, and what happened is when president obama got elected, he faced the worst deficit crisis. that deficit went up to well over a trillion. he's gotten it back to $850 billion. it's still too high, but the fact is i never heard a word from my really good friends on the other side of the aisle. when they were racking up those deficits. oh, this supply-side stuff is going to be great. well, it wasn't great, it wasn't good, and i'm glad that this budget takes us back to the notion in the clinton years which is you have a balanced approach between rev
in 1997 when, under president clinton, we all worked together and balanced the budget for the first time in 30 years. came into the senate in 2001. we were debating the largest budget budget surplus projected in the history of the country. that's where we were. and the question was, what kind of economic policies, what kinds of approaches would we put in place to be able to manage that fact that we had the largest budget surplus projected in the history of the country. and there were two proposals put forward at that time. and we and when the look at the way the debt was going in 2001, it's amazing, if we had taken a different track than what happened. i remember as a new member, a new democrat that our leader on our side of the aisle, senator conrad, came forward with a proposal that i felt was eminently reasonable. he said, why don't we take that budget surplus projected explus divide it into third -- projected budget surplus and divide it into their. a third of it for strategic tax cuts to grow the economy, a third of it for strategic investments in education and science, r&d, you kno
did in making us forget the things he did? >> at his funeral, bill clinton sort of said let's not judge, they will come a time when we don't judge his entire presidency by his one mistake. he was in public life or 50 years. i think they're taking a broader view of nixon now. the warp was johnson's war. he had told people the u.s. can't fool. he was a cold warrior. this was a great tragedy. 58,000 americans died in network, and 18,000 of them died while nixon was president. they didn't have to. but i don't think -- i think people will never forget what he did. so don't take it medicaid is the right word but i think we'll begin to see him for all his personal quirks, the farther the way -- away we get from them, the wider perspective that we are interesting view will have on them, i hope spent i disagree slightly with it. i think there was an effort made to alter public perceptions. i think richard nixon had a lot to offer as president on foreign policy. one of the things i have to say that richard nixon is he believed in the big play, or you call it a hail mary pass. he was w
of professional ladder and it was extremely unpleasant. >> never lost its punch. that is what hillary clinton said. i could have stayed home and baked cookies and people were appalled. >> i want to read a quote that speaks to this from "the feminine mystique: 50 years" which shows what was. as women move into the work place. she wrote another hazard a woman facing on her way out of attracting to hostility of other housewives. and over and over again said she was for choice. she did not say you must get a top level job. she said you need to be free to choose what kind of life you want which includes work or may not. she was not -- even though i looked at "the feminine mystique: 50 years" again, not very kind to the housewife staying home. i think politically she saw very quickly you cannot dismiss many hundreds and thousands of people, you have to respect them and make it possible for them to feel pride in themselves or they will come and kill you. >> you don't want to be denigrating. i don't think it is in feminism's interest or the interest of reality to be denigrating how difficult child care, t
, 185 different welfare programs and block grants the largest and most expensive ones just as clinton did with aid to families with children. we have this reform of entitlement and reform of these welfare programs and tax reform taking the top rate on individuals to 25% and the bottom rate to 10%. now we go from 10 up to 44 and the corporate rate which is 35% right now. the average in europe is 25 so we compete internationally. we tax our companies and our manufacturing companies more harshly than they do theirs. we want to take that rate to 25. i would rather be better than europe and the canadians are at 17%. i preferred the canadian rate than the european average so the republicans and democrats in their two budgets really show who they are. there is also a third budget which is the congressional budget which is more liberal democrats and they do massive new taxes on top of the ones i discussed. you have a sense of there are some democrats who want to go even further into big government and patty than patty murray and president obama. >> host: americans for tax reform is best known
license so many ways. i would call the city in 1990 and 95 and 96 when the clinton administration called meetings between the representatives of ireland and the united states from a business and political point of view. i remember senator george schmidt chilled speaking about democracy. i remember him recalling his own family's involvement because of immigration and his economic circumstances. this country gave him the democratic opportunity to serve as senate leader for 20 years. he was followed at that meeting by ron brown who tragically lost his life in bosnia in a plane crash sometime later. he said about democracy that george mitchell pointed out he came here to this country because of economic reasons and he spoke of democracy in these terms. he said his ancestors came to america not because of economic circumstances but because they were in chains. at the same time democracy gave him the chance to participate in american life and serve it the highest levels of the administration. it was also evident though through the work of president clinton who refused to give up and often refe
with john endingler, welfare reform happened in the states. newt gingrich finally got bill clinton to sign it into law a little bit later. you go all the way back to the early 970s when ronald reagan wasn't the president, but the governor of california, and tax reform happened in that state. and it wasn't until later, ironically back in california, when ronald reagan as the president signed into raw the economic recovery -- into law the economic recovery act. real reform happened in the states. as was mentioned yesterday, there are now in america some 30 states that have republican governors and nearly as many that have republican legislatures. [applause] and so that's the good news. the good news is we have success, and it's happening in our states, and we can learn from that to tell our friends and our colleagues in washington how to move forward. because, you see, in the states to be successful we have to be optimistic. we have to be relevant. and most importantly, we have to be courageous. let me talk to you a little bit about each of those three things. you see, when it talks about be
the clinton administration and later served as commissioner of new york city's department of housing preservation and development. we thank you mr. secretary for joining us and we look forward to your testimony. and no stranger to the united states and that's where she once once -- and was at the finance committee? it's great to see you again secretary darcy. assistant secretary for civil works of the u.s. department of army. ms. darcy became assistant secretary in august 2009. prior to -- i'm picking up a pattern here. prior to appointment ms. darcy had a long and distinguished careers as legislator. from 93 to 2000 she served as a professional staff member on the senate environment and public works committee which is in markup right now and she then moved on to the senate finance committee where i had just come from where she served on the senate environmental, senior departmental advisor and we thank you very much for your work and the work that is being done. we will ask you to go at it and start your testimony and try to keep it five minutes. if you go a little beyond that it's
including by special appointment by both the clinton and bush justice departments. he's established himself as a tireless public servant and a defender of the public interest. and for these reasons and more we, the ncrc, awarded him with the henry b. gonzalez award in 2010 for his outstanding public service. and so we're pleased to have him here. so help me welcome the director of the cfpb, richard cordray. thank youment. [applause] >> thank you. thank you, bob. i could feel your distress as john was up here speaking about the -- i was afraid he might refer to the internets, and we might have to give him the hook. john told you he's over 50, i'm slightly over 50. [laughter] and back in our day between was part of the song rockin' robin, remember little michael jackson used to sing that. [laughter] now it has a much more respectable pedigree. [laughter] thank you, all of you, for inviting me here to be with you today. because of what you do every day, fighting to improve the lives of the nation's most vulnerable and underserved consumers, you are my personal heroes, and you set an important
balanced the budget. i was note those were the years when we had a democratic president, president clinton, we were working off of the 1993 deal that was made to both reduce spending and increase revenues. we had growth in the economy. we had low unemployment. we balanced the budget for five years in a row. now, during that time -- during that time our revenues averaged about 20% of our gross domestic product. now it's down to less than 18%. so -- and we also know that demographics, including the tens of millions of baby boomers becoming eligible for social security and medicare, will place vast new demands on our budget. at the same time we need to make investments in infrastructure, research, education to prepare our young people and our economy for the competitive global economy that's coming. i remind my colleagues that when president george w. bush's tax cut was passed in 2001, it was defended on the grounds that it was only going to take a small part of the projected surplus as that we were going to have for the next ten years. that was -- that's what was said. well, as we now know,
president clinton had seen president assad in geneva in january 1994. and prior to the trip, we had, you know, the prime minister conveyed to us what it is he wanted to see come out of it. and we actually produced what it is he wanted to see come out of it. so i walked into the meeting with rabin feeling highly confident, you know, all right, we did what you asked. and the first thing he did was immediately devalue what i came with. now, why did he do it? because he knew i was coming to ask something of him. and if you go into these kinds of meetings and the expectations are very high, then each leader is suddenly worried about what you're going to ask of them. when the expectations are low, you're in a much better position to have a serious conversation, and you can actually explore, all right, what are the possibilities here. but maybe the way you frame that conversation is by talking about what are the consequences of not getting anything done with each side? and if the consequences are severe enough, how can we think together about what it is that could be possible, and where could t
this issue that in january of 2001, when president bill clinton left office, this country had an annual federal budget surplus of $236 billion. a surplus of $236 billion in january 2001. we now have an $850 billion deficit. what happened? well, i think many americans know what happened. when you go to war in afghanistan and iraq and you don't pay for those wars, you add to the deficit. when you give huge tax breaks to the wealthiest people in this country and you don't offset that, you add to the deficit. when you pass a medicare part-d prescription drug program, you don't pay for that, you add to the deficit. and on top of all of that, we must understand that right now at 15.8% of g.d.p., revenue coming in to the federal government is the lowest that it has been in 60 years. and the reason for that is that we are in the midst of a very serious recession, a recession caused by the greed, recklessness and illegal behavior on wall street. and not only has that led to significant increases in unemployment and businesses going under; once again, it resulted in less tax revenue coming in to
a page out of the clinton play book from, gosh, 12, 13, 14, 15 years ago when we had a big deficit, not as big as this, but they adopted a deficit reduction plan, engineered buyer skin bowles and the president's chief of staff, and they did a deficit reduction plan in 1997 with bipartisan support that said for every dollar of spending that we cut, we raise a dollar of revenues. and we ended up with four balanced budgets in a row. the budget that comes out of the budget committee is similar in that it's dollar for dollar, dollar revenue, dollar deficit reduction on the revenue side or dollar on the spending side. but unlike what happened 12 years ago, -- 15 years ago, actually, we don't get to a balanced budget. if there is a fault in the budget that's come out of the budget committee, while it reduces our debt, publicly held debt as a percentage of gross domestic product from about 73%, 72% down to about 70% in ten years, it stabilizes the debt and starts to bring it down as a percentage of g.d.p. we still will have a budget deficit of over a trillion dollars ten years from now. is
. we can get to pay balanced budget without a sequester. we did that under bill clinton. we had a balanced approach. we made investments in our people. we cut out unnecessary spending. and we had a fair tax code. so, you know, i could go on with the problems. 25,000 fewer women will get breast cancer screenings. and i could offer an amendment on that. i want to offer an amendment on that, but i understand, we have to keep the government running. and that's what this continuing resolution does. and i praise the republicans on the other side that crossed over to vote with democrats. thank you very, very much for seeing that we can't turn this bill into everyone's favorite, you know, amendment to restore something that is cut because of the sequester that none of us ever thought was going to move forward. and i want to repeat this. my friend talks about the f.a.a. i agree with him. i hope he would agree with me on head start, on teachers, on title 1, on h.i.v. tests, on breast cancer screenings. and how about the $540 million that is cut from the small business administration loan
Search Results 0 to 31 of about 32 (some duplicates have been removed)